While Christian populations throughout the Arab world are in decline—due to discrimination, war, and in some places genocide—Israel is the one state in the region whose Christian population has grown in recent years. Robert Nicholson explains the shared fate of members of the two faiths living in the shadow of Islam, noting that, “as go the Jews in the Middle East, so go the Christians.”

Despite their many differences, these two communities share something positive and profound in the Hebraic tradition—that unique blend of stories and ideas that arise from the pages of the Hebrew Bible. Only Jews and Christians share this text, and both have been influenced by it in ways that are hard to overstate.

Embracing the Hebraic tradition . . . should not be seen as a negative response to Islam any more than a Muslim’s embracing the Islamic tradition should be seen as an insult to Christianity. It is natural and even desirable that communities celebrate their own unique identities. Recognizing who we are as Jews and Christians helps us understand the limits of our civilization and the futility of trying to impose it on others. It frees us to be ourselves and to defend who we are without guilt. . . .

The Middle East is the place in which the Hebraic and Islamic traditions meet. Both share Semitic roots, revere sacred texts, and hold transcendent views of God that trace their origins back to Abraham. It may be argued that a reinvigorated Hebraic tradition will understand Islam much better than the Hellenic tradition has been able to do so far. Religion is a powerful force in the Middle East, and Western diplomats ignore it to their detriment. . . .

A diverse Middle East is a peaceful Middle East. Millions of Muslims understand this, and welcome the presence of these minorities as neighbors.

Tamir Hayman analyzes the latest reports about an offer by Hamas to release three female soldiers in exchange for 150 captured terrorists, of whom 90 have received life sentences; then, if that exchange happens successfully, a second stage of the deal will begin.

If this does happen, Israel will release all the serious prisoners who had been sentenced to life and who are associated with Hamas, which will leave Israel without any bargaining chips for the second stage. In practice, Israel will release everyone who is important to Hamas without getting back all the hostages. In this situation, it’s evident that Israel will approach the second stage of the negotiations in the most unfavorable way possible. Hamas will achieve all its demands in the first stage, except for a commitment from Israel to end the war completely.

How does this relate to the fighting in Rafah? Hayman explains:

In the absence of an agreement or compromise by Hamas, it is detrimental for Israel to continue the static situation we were in. It is positive that new energy has entered the campaign. . . . The [capture of the] border of the Gaza Strip and the Rafah crossing are extremely important achievements, while the ongoing dismantling of the battalions is of secondary importance.

That being said, Hayman is critical of the approach to negotiations taken so far:

Gradual hostage trades don’t work. We must adopt a different concept of a single deal in which Israel offers a complete cessation of the war in exchange for all the hostages.